Hi Mariano, yes, I know what you mean. I was in the same position and wanted to start before my 'competitors', so I decided to start very early with a free 'beta'. I think this was the right direction because it still the only application for this porpose. I will keep a limited version in the future and will start the next weeks with a 'Pro license' that will switch off some limitations in the free version. Now we can offer paid apps from Germany. We will see, which negative comments I will get for this... If you are interested in a pro license you can have a look at
http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers/browse_thread/thread/df5a3a1d08b9ae2f Mirko P.S. Great little app your NewsRob, I loaded it 2 months ago ;-) On 14 Mai, 09:18, Mariano Kamp <[email protected]> wrote: > >There are lots of free loaders who don't want to pay for anything. And > > there are lots of people with >lots of free time creating free apps, thus > reinforcing the mentality of the free loaders. > Well, and it didn't help that Google screwed up with the release of paid > apps. > As you remember developers are not on equal footing. Paid apps were > available in mid of Q1, but only for developers from the US and UK. A major > screwup. If there is one thing we learned from Apple's Appstore then it's > this: The winner (of a category) takes it all. > > So what should you have done as a developer from another country? I wanted > to release a paid version, but I couldn't. At the same time my "competitors" > released full versions of their apps. I tried to use Ads as a way to limit > my free, but fully functional version, but that only gave me bad reviews, no > money (of course, I knew that) and in the end I scraped even that. After > Google continued to disappoint me with their special communication style and > no end was in sight I gave up. There isn't that much functionality left that > I could implement to "justify" a paid version. > And now my app is free (as in beer) and will be the only significant app I > wrote for the Android platform. I invested 500 hours and I am not gonna do > that again for free. I can't do that to my girl friend and paying job > again. > > Having said that. Since yesterday, some more countries were allowed to > promote the failure that is called Google Checkout. So at some point in > time, developers of new apps will be on equal footing. > And burned developers like me, will not pollute the Android Market anymore > with free apps that should have cost money. > > So these are just growing problems and will go away soon. I think this is > part of the whole growing up thing, for Google and their Android Market, but > also for developers. > And maybe, in an ideal world, users will learn to appreciate paying for > polished, non-trivial software (like they do on the Mac platform), but I am > not holding my breath. > > On the downside, I think, that Android is already established as a platform > for free loaders. Let's see how Palm handles this. > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 7:21 PM, Mattaku Betsujin < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > I think you can make the situation a lot better for yourself by .... > > accepting that people generally suck. > > > There are lots of free loaders who don't want to pay for anything. And > > there are lots of people with lots of free time creating free apps, thus > > reinforcing the mentality of the free loaders. > > > I think the people who complain about your paid app are a minority, albeit > > a loud one. So just ignore them and life goes on. Also, most paid apps on > > Android market are harnessed equally by the free loaders, so you're not the > > only one. > > > If their comments on the market really bother you, then just get 3 G1 > > accounts, and you can make sure that you always have 3 five-star comments on > > the first page :-) > > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 9:28 AM, Al Sutton <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> My solution would be to leave the old version on the market, then, under > >> a new name, have the lite and pro versions. > > >> Put in the 325 char description that the old app is not supported and > >> people may want to look at the new app name. > > >> Al. > > >> Keith Wiley wrote: > >> > First I will explain my situation. Then, I would greatly appreciate > >> > constructive dialog on how other developers feel similar situations > >> > should be managed. > > >> > I wrote a simple app in November. I offered it for free on the Market > >> > for two reasons. One, Google hadn't implemented paid apps yet, so I > >> > had no choice. Two, by my own admission, v1.0 was too simple too > >> > garner payment. > > >> > However, in the app's documentation, I requested donations toward > >> > future development. Out of thousands of installs, I received nothing. > > >> > This week I finished a considerably fancier version of the program. > >> > Given hundreds of hours of unpaid development, I decided to charge a > >> > few bucks for the new version. I split the app into lite and pro > >> > versions. The lite version has all the new fancy features enabled but > >> > is limited in how large a document can be created (spread sheet, I > >> > limited the number of rows/cols, admittedly unlimited in the earlier > >> > version). The pro version went to Market as a new app, the lite > >> > version on top of the old app to retain the long feedback history. > > >> > Since the Market provides no way to downgrade, I put the old unlimited > >> > version on my website and put directions in the new lite version in > >> > multiple places explaining how to revert to the old version. Thus, > >> > any user dissatisfied with the rol/col limit could restore the EXACT > >> > functionality they had before upgrading to the lite version. > > >> > Incidentally, the 325 character blurb allotted on the Market was > >> > insufficient to list the new features and the lite version's > >> > limitation and the caveat that the lite version could be reverted > >> > through my website. I simply could not communicate these facts to > >> > users to help them decide whether to upgrade or what to expect after > >> > upgrading. > > >> > The complaints about the new lite version have been diverse. Most > >> > pertinent to this discussion are complaints that the lite version now > >> > limits the rows/cols where the previous version didn't. I find such > >> > complaints unjustifiable since I explicitly permit reversion. I > >> > literally don't see what they have to complain about. Another irksome > >> > genre of complaints is that the program is still too simple to ask any > >> > money for at all. I am infuriated. It costs less than an ice cream > >> > cone. > > >> > So, as discussion, how would other developers handle this situation: > >> > initial app is simple so offered for free, later version is complex so > >> > split into lite/pro. You don't want to limit the lite version by not > >> > showing the new fancy features, so the limitation must be something > >> > else, a time limit, a forced delay splash screen, something. I chose > >> > limited rows/cols on a spreadsheet app, but also permitted reversion > >> > to the old unlimited version. > > >> > How would other developers implement an increase in complexity, charge > >> > for it, yet provide a lite version that doesn't anger users of a > >> > previously unlimited, but also much more simplistic app? > > >> > Instead of flaming me where you think I made mistakes, please just > >> > open the floor for honest discussion. I'm trying to figure out how to > >> > do this properly. A lot of us are probably trying to figure out the > >> > same thing. > > >> > Thanks. > > >> -- > > >> * Written an Android App? - List it athttp://andappstore.com/* > > >> ====== > >> Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the > >> company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House, > >> 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK. > > >> The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not > >> necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's > >> subsidiaries. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
